Indian or the arrow?

If you can shoot, you can shoot. Just like Tiger Woods golf clubs won't make you a better golfer, but Tiger Woods could beat you at golf with a cheap set of Walmart clubs. A great gun won't make you a better shooter. That's a skill you must hone through time and practice.
 
I remember hearing about a famous photographer who kept getting the question of what equipment do you use, like it was what made his work so popular. He finally asked someone back, " you're a good writer, what word processor do you use?"
 
Last edited:
I remember hearing about a famous photographer who kept getting the question of what equipment do you use, like it was what made his work so popular. He finally asked someone back, " you're a good writer, what word processor do you use?"

Well known photographer was dating a pretty young lady. It was getting serious and her father invited them to dinner, asking if he’d bring some work to show them. The mother admired his worked and asked about what cameras and other equipment he used. After dinner the photographer thanked the parents for a fine evening and as he left said to the mother that the dinner was delicious, he really did need to know what kind of pans she used. Or at least that’s what I’ve been told.

For shooting it’s the Indian, but even the worst Indian with an A-10 would be pretty effective, so at the extremes equipment does matter.
 
I'm guessing that since it's in here that we're after something in particular?

Sure, if you can shoot, you can shoot.

However, if you take an untrained shooter that can shoot something at say 200 yards, then throw them at the 1k yard line (even with the best gear) they'd likely still have a hard time hitting the berm the first time.

Take a rifle and shooter that's shoots 1 moa and at distance obviously they will be less accurate then one that is capable of consistently shooting half that. That's why most long ranges have a qualification to be able to use it. Ours here has 1200 yards and there's like 11 of us that can use it the last time I checked.

Choosing an optic? If you can't see it, you ain't gonna hit it very easily. That's not to say a fixed 10x isn't gonna work, but I'll take a S&B variable over the swfa any day of the week. Add to that, I'm getting old and the magnification helps, but i will take clear glass over magnification most times.

Ammo, if it's not consistent how can you plan accordingly? If you can't count on where something is supposed to go then it's going to be pretty hard make it count when it's needed.

Basically I think we are all chasing consistency. Whether it's the ammo, rifle, etc...
 
I have been shooting less than 4 years. In my case it’s definitely the Indian. Tried several guns and I still suck.
 
Just go to a USPSA match and do this:
Go up to Chris Tilley and bet him 1,000$ you can beat him if you trade guns. Then, give him yer crap Taurus and take his 10,000$ race gun.

Then: PURE PROFIT SON.
 
Just go to a USPSA match and do this:
Go up to Chris Tilley and bet him 1,000$ you can beat him if you trade guns. Then, give him yer crap Taurus and take his 10,000$ race gun.

Then: PURE PROFIT SON.

:D
 
  • Like
Reactions: NKD
Clearly it's the shooter that makes the shots.

The quality of the equipment will reduce the operational tolerance of the shot (Rifle+Optic+Ammo+how well those components have been assembled = the operational tolerance of each shot, you then will have to add environmental conditions on top of that for the theoretical probability of a hit or "good" hit)

When you have quality gear that is installed appropriately and maintained well, you remove some of the variation from the calculation. So good gear obviously helps, but it is all worth nothing if you don't know how to read the environment.
 
Unless the Indian can shoot he ain’t gonna be able to find out if there’s a problem with the other parts of the equation ... that’s why I get my kid to shoot when I want to know if a change in the equation makes a difference (damn you g eyes and steadier hold).

No joke ... I can run a 5 shot group in load development at 1” at 100 yards and he’ll come behind me and run a 1/2” inch group ... all other variables held constant ... the Indian is the key.
 
Last edited:
I like to think of it like rock climbing:

Will the best shoes for climbing available make it easier for YOU to climb El Capitan?


If the answer to this question is "Yes": you are either already a great climber or you suck and are completely delusional. A surprising amount of people fit into that second category.
 
So here's a dilemma... I'm a poor rifle shooter and I want to get better. Do I -
Practice with the best equipment available to me and have full confidence that the rifle is not the problem when things don't work?
or stick with one basic rifle and shoot the snot out of it until I have a good reason to upgrade?
 
So here's a dilemma... I'm a poor rifle shooter and I want to get better. Do I -
Practice with the best equipment available to me and have full confidence that the rifle is not the problem when things don't work?
or stick with one basic rifle and shoot the snot out of it until I have a good reason to upgrade?

Stick with the basic rifle and spend money on ammo and training (don't forget a range membership). When you are comfortable with your groups, or can consistently shoot the same sized groups, then I would invest in better equipment. My biggest improvement came when I started shooting further distances.
 
So here's a dilemma... I'm a poor rifle shooter and I want to get better. Do I -
Practice with the best equipment available to me and have full confidence that the rifle is not the problem when things don't work?
or stick with one basic rifle and shoot the snot out of it until I have a good reason to upgrade?

Practice ... practice ... practice. To do that you don’t need an expensive tricked out centerfire ... a good bolt action rimfire (CZ 455, Savage MK II or such) with decent scope is an easy and cost effective way to shoot a lot of rounds for budget friendly cost. A 5-shot ragged hole group at 25 yards from a .22 means you move on to a ragged hole at 50 ... and so on. You’re using the same basics to fire a .22 as you would a .308, 6.5 or other rifle so practice is easier on you and your wallet.

As to upgrading ... I still love my CZ 455 but I’ve lately been spending a lot of time with an old Mossberg 44 US-D (yep, made in 1944 so 74 years old) that has old aperture sights and making ragged holes. That $300 rifle teaches me the mechanics as well if not better than any other rifle I own (and still outshoots me).

You don’t have to spend a crap load of money on equipment ... just make sure it’s good equipment ... you need to spend a crap load of time behind equipment you know is good (have someone you know is a rifleman test it to make sure it’s good to go) and work on you.
 
So here's a dilemma... I'm a poor rifle shooter and I want to get better. Do I -
Practice with the best equipment available to me and have full confidence that the rifle is not the problem when things don't work?
or stick with one basic rifle and shoot the snot out of it until I have a good reason to upgrade?

I think it's useful to hand off the rifle to someone with known ability. See what they can do with it.

That usually puts any suspicions of a horrible gun out of my mind!
 
Last edited:
Shoot competitions and observe the other shooters to improve your techniques. That, a good rifle setup, and a truck load of ammo will make you a shooter. Most don't have the money or desire to be in the top class but shooting can/will be more fun if you shoot for your own self worth and satisfaction.
 
Last edited:
I was told of a local fellow recently who said to a group that he had Never missed. Never. One of the group asked we what I thought. I said he either needs to speed up or back up.
 
So here's a dilemma... I'm a poor rifle shooter and I want to get better. Do I -
Practice with the best equipment available to me and have full confidence that the rifle is not the problem when things don't work?
or stick with one basic rifle and shoot the snot out of it until I have a good reason to upgrade?
How's the quote go?

Beware the man with only one rifle
 
Take any rifle. Remove all sighting devices. Just have the straight ( or bent or whatever ) barrel. Shoot as many rounds as it takes to hit where you aim it. You're done. Lesson learned. Now you can accurately shoot any zeroed weapon you pick up with any sighting method. Don't let the absence of a sight scare you. It's not the sight...it's YOUR sight.
 
So here's a dilemma... I'm a poor rifle shooter and I want to get better. Do I -
Practice with the best equipment available to me and have full confidence that the rifle is not the problem when things don't work?
or stick with one basic rifle and shoot the snot out of it until I have a good reason to upgrade?
If you know someone who is a good shooter......let them try your rifle out and if their results are good, use it as a baseline.
 
Sooo here we go. I've shot NRA HP, IDPA, USPSA, and IHMSA and now NSSA. In years on the line and on the range, I'd say it's somewhat a mix of both, BUT, the part equipment plays is to magnify the actual skill of the shooter and not solidly one or the other. I was on the range with a guy who couldn't shoot a 6in group at 100yds off a bench with a 9x scope with his AR. He was blaming the equipment and asked if I'd look at it. I shot a sub 3in group offhand at 100yd with his gun. Nope, not the rifle, but user error.

If you have equipment that is basically good, then nothing can take the place of practice and instruction. Shoot a basic 22lr with nothing but iron sights and learn to hit with it at various distances. Or shoot a black powder gun with irons and do the same. Then move over to that high end precision rifle and you'll look like a rock star. Technique (the Indian) is soooo important. I can't count the number of times I've seen folks at the range who put lots of bucks into a gun but can't shoot for shinola. They blame everything but themselves. See the same on the golf course.
 
I'm going to say it's the combination of quality of technique and quality equipment. An excellent or poor marksmen can equally only get lucky with erratic equipment. However, apply the correct technique to excellent equipment and you'll get excellent results.

Have watched several people who never fired a long gun make 1st round hits at significant distance after being briefly coached on technique. Had nothing to do with inherent skill, only proper technique applied to excellent equipment. The results speak for themselves.
 
It's always the indian, without question. This presumes a competent level of equipment, which does not have to be the most expensive. There is usually a sweet spot in the performance/investment ratio, somewhere in the upper mid-range. Here equipment is not the limiting factor, the operator is. This is true for just about any sports/activity involving gear.
 
I think the Indian must have confidence that the bow and arrow are dependable, so that the Indian has no choice but to admit that the misses are his own.

FWIW: a rifle that inspires that confidence is NOT the most expensive thing you can afford. The rifle/ammo combination just need to dependably shoot where they’re aimed.
 
Its been said many times before in this thread, but shooter skill comes first. No amount of high speed, low drag precision gear is going to make a bad shooter shoot good.

Good equipment allows a good shooter to be more consistent, and removes variables from the equation.

likewise, really bad equipment can teach some bad habits, but its got to be outstandingly bad gear.

I can't even remember how many times I've told a new guy just starting out to chill out and just buy an entry level AR or a walmart bolt action rifle while they're learning. You can't buy skill. Spend the extra cash on targets and ammo.

And once you know your skill level, you can tailor your guns, optics, and ammo to that. Me, personally? I'm not a 1000 yard shooter. I don't have access to such a range. I'd like to try it one day, but at the moment, its only a thought. For what I do, mid-range AR's and a remington bolt action rifle suit me just fine, and I feel they both are capable of better mechanical accuracy than I am.
 
Last edited:
Skill translates down a lot; up, a little. Tiger Woods can shoot a 65 with a $100 set of crappy clubs. He probably won't play that much better with the set made of unobtanium, but maybe just a little. I have shot the USMC M40a5 at 1,000 yards, with the $3k S&B scope. I didn't shoot it that much better than my first bolt, a Rem 700 with stock trigger and a SS 10x scope, barely a $1k set-up. All of that just reiterates what others here have said.

Also training: you shoot a cheap set-up better if you had a lot of training/practice than if you have a $3K set-up you shoot very little.
 
My two cents;
Some of all the above.

My advice;
By basic gear, spend the money you save toward quality training with a reputable instructor. If you suck after that, better gear ain't gonna help. If you already have great gear and suck, you left out the training part.
Practice does NOT make perfect. PERFECT practice makes perfect.

Be consistent in your training and resolute in execution.

OK, I gotta charge you guys more than two cents for all that!
 
Back
Top Bottom